Clause 15.3 and why Masi broke the rules

Come on, man.

 

'Sorry, I thought the link took one to the post itself, by a moderator, which is #178.

 

Seeing as this is a Ferrari Forum why is nobody crying bloody murder for Sainz who was denied the opportunity to run Max or Lewis close at the finish when the lapped cars between him and Max were not moved out of the way.

 

I didn't see Sainz let alone Binotto complain after the race.

 

I did say that the best outcome of the race was for Elton Hamdashian and Max Vercrashin to have taken each other out of the race at that last corner of the last lap.

 

What team is Sainz on?

 

Again, I respectfully disagree.

Rule 15.3 doesn't remove Rue 48.12. Post #137 above (not mine) is a pretty good read on what the rule is. It is still applicable. So Masi did NOT operate within the rules since he violated Rule 48.12

. It would have been easy to have a green flag last lap under all of the rules had Masi simply not allowed (some) of the lapped cars to unlap. That was the manifest error. Safety Car would have come in as it did and green flag thrown as it was. There would be no rule requiring another lap for the Safety Car. Only difference was 5 cars between Max and Lewis. Simple as that.

I am NOT unhappy Max won. He may have won anyway. But as a true sportsman, you win under the rules, not outside of them. I have been to many a track event where I have helped my competitor repair his car or vice versa. I want to win against the best the competitor has to offer. I don't want to back door a victory.

I would have been upset if a red flag was thrown and that was WITHIN the rules. I am glad Masi did not do that.

If the argument is to right past wrongs or balance the scales of justice, we can go back and forth forever. But that is not relevant. If it is, then let's just dump the rules entirely. Give everyone a participation trophy for showing up to play. Let's just watch boxing or bullfighting.

Regards,
Jerry

 

It’s real simple, Jerry.

 

Pretty much a page out of my book. Also with you on actually particpating, tho' 'twas 40+ years ago.
Naaahhh. That would be too "real". If we're going to "script"/orchestrate/choreograph racing (which is happening to all the top series I'm afraid), I rather just go sit comfortably in a theatre and catch a well written and acted, exciting, fictional, movie.....'no false pretense there.

 

Thanks for that. I watched it. It appears to be about 1 or 2 days after the event.

David Croft is a great commentator. But he is also out to bolster the sport. He did not write the rules. So while I respect his opinion, I don't agree with it. That is the face saving argument that occurred at the protest after the race.

David has nothing bad to say about Masi. I don't think Masi erred on purpose. He has worked hard this year, but there have been an extraordinary number of bad decisions for both Mercedes and Red Bull (along with a few others not germane). I agree with almost everything, including the option to throw the red flag (although resumption is either a standing start or a rolling start at the discretion of the Race Director, David also got that wrong).

But he concludes without any proof that 48.13 overrides 48.12. It does not by the terms of the rules. If the rules say 48.13 overrides 48.12 at the discretion of the RD, then I stand corrected. I have not seen that. And if it does, then 48.12 is without force and is subject to the whim of the RD. Not a good result, but as I noted before I don't believe that is correct since you read each rule in a way to uphold all the other rules.

I agree that the Safety Car driver is bound to obey the RD. To that extent, the SC is required to follow the RD directive. So if the SC stays out 1 more lap, he complies with 48.12 but violates 48.13 and the RD directive. If he comes in as directed, he complies with 48.13 and the directive, BUT VIOLATES 48.12 (no fault of the Bernd or whoever was driving). There is no other reasonable way to interpret those rules. So the error is Masi's; by issuing the directive under 48.13 he ignored and violated 48.12. To quote a phrase, "It's real simple".

Thanks for the civil discussion. Although I am glad Max won, I am unhappy about the way he did it. Max is a great talent. He can close a gap under braking like no one else currently in F1. I will always believe Max backed into the WDC because the RD failed to follow the rules when Max had an even money chance to beat Lewis wheel to wheel on the track.

Regards,
Jerry

 

Jerry, ultimately you can keep typing all you like. As he states in the video all the stewards and teams agree that no rules were broken. Let me repeat ALL teams, that includes Mercedes. So that being said your opinion differs from ALL the teams and people who actually work in the sport. Also he lays it out very simply 15.3 over rules 48.13 which over rules 48.12. This FACT is EXACTLY what ALL the teams including Mercedes agree with.

 

So why even have the prior rule at all?

Why aren't you upset that the rules can be changed at will?

 

Even as a Ferrari fan I think it was best—in the interest of fairness to the two title contenders—for Sainz to be out the the fight on the last lap. Also because he wasn’t close to keeping up prior to the SC and on old hards I doubt he’d have been a threat for either first or second.

 

So entertainment, not racing.

 

The people who wrote the rules dismissed the protest, man.

 

Bono man!

 

The rules weren’t changed at all. The existing rules were used to achieve what race control and all the teams, including Mercedes, agreed to before hand, to end the race under green flag racing conditions.

 

Max will be WDCx2 by the time this thread is over, man

 

Right

It’s called fair play—the same way backmarkers aren’t expected to interfere in a battle for the lead—but mostly, being realistic; no way Sainz would have challenged either Max or HAM on old tires.

 

Of course that is what they all said (and Mercedes after they decided not to appeal, not before). There is no other way to justify the outcome and no one disputes that we all know that the FIA would never change the result of a race, let alone the last race of the season deciding the championship. Hence the "analysis" of 15.3 covering everything. The don't explain it or analyze the rules, they just put a blanket statement saying 15.3 covers everything (end on a green flag when at all possible). Any other interpretation would undermine the FIA's policing itself.

If no issues, then why the announcement of an investigation to "improve" the sport based on this race? No one really believes that. It is to fix this screw up so it can't happen again. That is as close to an admission of fault as you will ever see from a group like the FIA.

So with the FIA policing themselves and Mercedes surely competing next year, with Lewis, the teams sing kumbaya in public. Big surprise.

I hope Max jumps out to a big lead next year so he can be a clear and unambiguous champion that he deserves to be.

Regards,
Jerry

 

Edibles, or vape?

 

That's the case actually !

 

good summary!

 

I'm sorry, you've obviously put a lot of time and thought into this post ... but it is laughably naive, and sounds like the product of a first-year law student rather than a seasoned professional.

The argument that 15.3 is so overly restrictive, that it gives the Racing Director nothing but the duties of the racing clerk's supervisor is patently ridiculous. A few very simple questions will illustrate the point:

Who makes the split-second decisions, should something unanticipated happen? What if the safety car crashes? What if the safety car gets a flat tire? What happens when there's another accident behind the safety car, because a fan runs out onto the track? The point is, the rules cannot possibly, specifically, anticipate every imaginable scenario ... instead, "someone" is given the power and authority to make quick decisions in the "heat of the battle" ... and 15.3 clearly gives that power to the Race Director. Too much power, you say? Nonsense. Of course he can make bad decisions, that put the life of all drivers in jeopardy. It's called racing ... simply by taking the seat of a VERY lethal machine called an F1 car, every driver is given life and death decision making power, every second of every race. Do you still disagree? Then tell us this: If not the Racing Director, then who exactly is given the authority to make split-second decisions for the infinite possible scenarios that could happen under the safety car? A lawyer, perhaps? The conclusion is inescapable: your reading of 15.3 is naive, and WAY too restrictive.

Regarding 48.12: this has been debated to death, and the "any" vs "all" argument will never be settled. What can be offered, however, is simply this: lawyers have long recognized the ambiguity in the term "any", and have commonly adopted the phrase "any and all" to help clear-up the ambiguity. Sadly, no such wording exists in 48.12 ... which leaves 48.12 open to interpretation. Who, prey tell, has the authority to make the call? The Racing Director, of course (see above)

Regarding 48.13: Even the pro-Hamilton racing stewards recognize that 48.13 supercedes 48.12. The reason is simple: note the "WHEN" language in 48.13, compared to the "IF" language in 48.12. The safety car period MUST ALWAYS end, at a time ultimately decided by the Race Director (even if it is at race's end) ... but the unlapping of lapped cars is purely at the discretion of the racing clerk (and therefore the Race Director, of course).


CONCLUSION: At the end of the day, there is a WIDELY accepted "hierarchy of the rules" ... as there always must be ... that is well-supported by the language in the sporting regs:

15.3 > 48.13 > 48.12

THIS is why all pro-Hamilton protests and appeals ultimately collapsed. THIS is why Max Verstappen is the clear, unchallenged 2021 World Champion.


To the Hamilton fans: Give it up, already! Your hero was beaten this year, by a better driver. There's nothing you can do to change it.

 

I think the most illuminating thing to come out of all of this is that it has become quite clear why they are Hamilton fans in the first place. Birds of a feather...